How do you know that?
The police operator suggested he didn't need to follow Martin. Zimmerman replied "OK" and apparently limited his "pursuit" to an attempt to see where Martin was heading, so that he could direct the responding officer. It was dark. He told the dispatcher he lost Martin. And when the dispatcher asked for Zimmerman's address, he broke off giving his full address, saying he wasn't sure where Martin was (i.e., for all Zimmerman knew, close enough to overhear him uttering his address!).
Zimmerman's story is that Martin appeared out of the shadows and accosted him as he was returning to his truck and attacked him. Unless the prosecution can disprove that, Zimmerman can't be convicted of anything.
I'm afraid that if Zimmerman is not punished (even by a slap on the wrist), we'll see a deluge of similar incidents, all pointing at the Zimmerman case for their defense.
Tough skittles! That's no rationale for justice.
I know that because it's been in the news. Tough skittles! That's no rationale for justice.
Actually, from everything I've ever heard about the justice system, is that its primary purpose is to prevent vigilanteism. Some people who are already predisposed to wanting to take matters into their own hands most certainly would use the Zimmerman case as justification if it looks like he got away with vigilanteism.